Você está na página 1de 6

The International Journal Of Engineering And Science (IJES)

|| Volume || 3 || Issue || 11 || Pages || 27-32 || 2014 ||


ISSN (e): 2319 1813 ISSN (p): 2319 1805

Microbiological Quality of Malaysian Heritage Food (Satar)


Sold In Marang and Kemaman, Terengganu, Malaysia
1

Nurul Atiqah Ramli, 1*Mohd Nizam Lani, 2Roshita Ibrahim, 3Rozila Alias, and
4
Zaiton Hassan
1

School of Food Science and Technology, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia.


Department of Chemical Engineering Technology, Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia
Perlis, Malaysia
3
Institute of Bio-IT Selangor, Universiti Selangor, Malaysia
4
Faculty of Science and Technology, Islamic Science University of Malaysia, Malaysia

---------------------------------------------------ABSTRACT-----------------------------------------------------Satar is a Malaysian heritage ready-to-eat (RTE) food, especially in Terengganu and Kelantan. Due to lack
of standard hygiene of Satar preparation, microbial load of Satar prior to grilling is considerably high.
Therefore, in this study, microbiological methods were used to determine the microbiological quality in raw
and cooked Satar at four different stalls in Kemaman and Marang, Terengganu. The samples were analysed
for Aerobic plate count (APC), Enterobacteriaceae count, Staphylococcus aureus count, Yeasts and Molds
count (YM) and psychrotrophic count. There were significant difference (P<0.05) between the microbiological
analyses conducted between raw and cooked Satar at four different stalls in Marang and Kemaman. The
results showed that grilling had significantly decreased the microbial loads in Satar up to 8-log10 reduction.
This study also indicated that the mean of microbial quality of selected Satar premises in Marang and
Kemaman were not significantly different (P>0.05). This study has provided some scientific evidences on the
microbiological quality that reflects the current hygienic practice of Satar premises in Terengganu. The
implementation of Good Hygiene Practice (GHP) and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP)
in Satar production may improve the hygienic status and quality of Satar production.

KEYWORDS : Grilling, Malaysian heritage food, microbiological quality, ready-to-eat food, Satar
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Date of Submission: 31 October 2014
Date of Accepted: 10 November 2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. INTRODUCTION
Satar is one of heritage food in Malaysia and it is normally served in any occasion as an appetizer,
in the East Coast of Peninsular Malaysia, especially in Terengganu and Kelantan. Heritage food is part of
heritage tourism which is considered as an important segment of tourism industry in order to attract tourists to
the destination [1]. Satar is a mixture of boneless fish and spices and wrapped in banana leaf and grilling
over the charcoal of fire to make Satar cooked and ready for consumption. The processed fish normally used
yellowstripe scad (Selaroides leptolepis), crimson jobfish (Nemipterus spp., Pentapodus spp. and Scolopsis
spp.) and Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus spp.) [2].
Grilling is a choice of preparation of certain RTE foods because it can retain the good sensory
characteristics of food compare if it is prepared through direct cooking. It is done on opened grid over a heat
source which may be charcoal, a gas-heated element or an electric element and applied to food to improve its
microbiological safety by inactivation of pathogenic microorganisms. Besides that, sufficient heat treatment
and appropriate grilling method for Satar would help to enhance its flavour and taste as well as increase the
shelf life [3].
Satar is a street food sold by hawker, where the food is prepared and sold at the streets for
immediate consumption at later time without further preparation. Handling, processing, storage and display of
'Satar' may also reflect the microbiological load of RTE foods at the point of sale [4, 5], while the quality of the
ingredients contribute to the initial microbiological load of food. Any unhygienic practices during food
handling and preparation at eating places may contribute to cause foodborne illness [6]. Recently, Lani and coworkers [7] had reported the microbiological quality of food contact surfaces at selected food premises of
www.theijes.com

The IJES

Page 27

Microbiological Quality of Malaysian Heritage Food (Satar)


Satar in Terengganu. However, the status of microbiological quality of Satar is limited in the literature,
therefore, the objective of this present study was to determine the microbiological quality of Satar produced in
Marang and Kemaman, Terengganu, as these locations are the major attractions of customers and tourists to
buy Satar from local food premises in Terengganu.
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Description of samples: Twelve pieces of raw Satar (before grilling) and twelve pieces of cooked Satar
(after grilling) were purchased randomly from four different Satar stalls in Marang and Kemaman,
Terengganu. The samples were collected in sterile packaging in an icebox (4+1C) and brought back to Food
Microbiology Laboratory in Universiti Malaysia Terengganu and they were analysed immediately upon arrival
in the lab.
Microbiological analysis: 25 g of raw and cooked Satar were weighed and transferred into sterile stomacher
bag. Then, 225 ml of 0.1% buffered peptone water (Merck, Germany) was added and homogenized for three
minutes at normal speed in a stomacher (Bag Mixer, Interscience, France). Serial dilutions were made with 9
ml of 0.1% buffered peptone water until the desired dilutions. Then, 0.1 ml of food homogenate was pipetted
out from each dilution of the homogenate into duplicate plates of Plate Count Agar (Merck, Germany) for
Aerobic Plate count, Baird Parker Agar (Merck, Germany) for S. aureus count, Violet Red Bile Dextrose Agar
(Merck, Germany) for Enterobacteriaceae count, and Potato Dextrose Agar (PDA) (Merck, Germany)
acidified with 10% tartaric acid solution for Yeast and Mold Count [8]. The homogenate was spread well on
each plate and all the plates were then inverted and incubated at 35C for 24 hours, except PDA plates that
were incubated at 25C for 5-7 days [9]. For psychrotrophic count, Plate Count Agar was used and incubated
in the chiller for 7-days before enumeration [8]. Enumeration of microbial count (CFU/g) was carried out using
standard microbiological procedures [8].
Statistical analysis: The present study used completely randomized design (CRD) as an experimental design.
Mean standard deviation of microbial counts of Aerobic Plate Count (APC), Enterobacteriaceae count, S.
aureus count, Yeast and Mould count and psychrotrophic count were analysed using one-way analysis of
variance (ANOVA) for different types of microbial count of raw and cooked Satar. The significant
differences (p<0.05) between treatments were determined using Tukeys Test. Meanwhile, the analysis was
continued using Independent sample t-Test for determination of significant difference between mean
standard deviation of microbial count in raw and cooked Satar in Kemaman and Marang, respectively. Raw
and cooked Satar between Marang and Kemaman were analysed using independent sample t-Test. The
statistical programme used was Statistical Programme for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Table 1 represents microbial analysis of raw Satar in different stalls from Marang. Aerobic plate count was
significantly higher from stall C than others while, stall B and C were highly significant than stall A and D for
Enterobacteriaceae count. Staphylococcus aureus count recorded higher microbial count from stall C and the
lowest count enumerated from stall A. However, there was no significant different (P>0.05) with stall B and D.
For yeast and mould count, there were significant different (P<0.05) of raw Satar at stall C and B while stall
D and A showed significantly lower than stall C. Stall C also recorded significantly difference compared to
other in psychrotrophic count.
Table 2 shows there was no significant different (p>0.05) from different stalls with different microbial analysis
of cooked Satar in different stalls at Marang. For overall result in Marang, stall C was the highest microbial
counts in raw Satar followed by stall B, stall A and D. For cooked Satar, the microbial counts were
substantially decreased about 6-8 log10CFU/g of aerobic plate count, 6-7 log10 CFU/g of psychrotrophic count
and S. aureus count. Yeast and mould count recorded 4-5 log10 CFU/g decreased.
Table 1: Microbial counts of raw Satar in different stalls at Marang
Enterobacteriaceae
S. aureus
Yeast and
Psychrotrophic
Sample of raw Aerobic plate
count
count
mould count count
'Satar'
at count
Marang
7.29+0.06c
7.12+0.10b
6.17+0.13b
4.62+0.28bc
6.44+0.44b
STALL A
b
a
ab
ab
7.82+0.31
7.85+0.07
6.97+0.49
5.36+0.32
6.66+0.14b
STALL B
a
a
a
a
8.38+0.06
8.11+0.06
7.21+0.32
5.65+0.41
7.65+0.25a
STALL C
d
c
ab
c
6.34+0.10
6.71+0.24
6.51+0.15
4.46+0.15
6.32+0.22b
STALL D
www.theijes.com

The IJES

Page 28

Microbiological Quality of Malaysian Heritage Food (Satar)


Note: values are Mean+ standard deviation (Log10 CFU/g) of 3 replicates
(a-c) mean bearing the same superscript within the same column are not significantly different at 5% level
(p<0.05)
Table 2: Microbial counts of cooked Satar in different stalls at Marang
Aerobic plate
Enterobacteriaceae
S. aureus count Yeast and
Psychrotrophic
Sample of
count
count
mould count
count
cooked
'Satar' at
Marang
1.59+1.43a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
STALL A
1.43+1.25a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
STALL B
a
a
a
a
1.77+1.53
0.00+0.00
0.00+0.00
0.00+0.00
0.00+0.00a
STALL C
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
STALL D
Note: values are Mean+ standard deviation (Log10 CFU/g) of 3 replicates
(a-c) mean bearing the same superscript within the same column are not significantly different at 5% level
(p<0.05)
Table 3: Microbial counts of raw Satar in different stalls at Kemaman
Sample of raw
'Satar' at
Kemaman

Aerobic plate
count

STALL A
STALL B

8.47+0.00a
8.40+0.03ab
7.15+0.32c
7.71+0.42bc

STALL C
STALL D

Enterobacteriaceae
count

7.65+0.13a
7.74+0.18a
6.72+0.23b
7.45+0.12a

S. aureus count

Yeast and
mould count

Psychrotrophic
count

7.94+0.12a
6.79+0.07b
5.41+0.16c
6.87+0.55b

5.22+0.09a
4.60+0.11a
2.67+2.31a
4.65+0.33a

7.38+0.07a
6.79+0.07b
7.43+0.02a
6.46+0.34b

Note: values are Mean+ standard deviation (Log10CFU/g) of 3 replicates


(a-c) mean bearing the same superscript within the same column are not significantly different at 5% level
(p<0.05)
Table 4: Microbial counts of cooked Satar in different stalls at Kemaman
Aerobic plate
Enterobacteriaceae
S. aureus count
Yeast and
Psychrotrophic
Sample of raw
count
count
mould count count
'Satar' at
Kemaman
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
STALL A
0.77+1.33a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
0.67+1.15a
0.00+0.00a
STALL B
a
a
a
a
0.00+0.00
0.00+0.00
0.00+0.00
0.00+0.00
0.00+0.00a
STALL C
0.83+1.43a
0.00+0.00a
0.00+0.00a
1.16+0.67a
0.00+0.00a
STALL D
Note: values are Mean+ standard deviation (Log10 CFU/g) of 3 replicates
(a-c) mean bearing the same superscript within the same column are not significantly different at 5% level
(p<0.05)
Table 5: Significant difference of types of microbial analysis between raw and cooked Satar in Marang
Types of microbial analysis

Microbial count
Sig. at
(Log10 CFU/g)
P<0.05
Raw
cooked
Aerobic plate count
7.46+0.79
1.20+0.79
0.00
Enterobacteriaceae count
7.45+0.60
0.00+0.00
0.00
S. aureus count
6.72+0.50
0.00+0.00
0.00
Yeast and mould count
5.02+0.58
0.00+0.00
0.00
Psychrotrophic count
6.77+0.60
0.00+0.00
0.00
Note: Values are average mean SD of raw and cooked Satar in Marang
www.theijes.com

The IJES

Conclusion

P<0.05
P<0.05
P<0.05
P<0.05
P<0.05

Page 29

Microbiological Quality of Malaysian Heritage Food (Satar)


Table 6: Significant difference of types of microbial analysis between raw and cooked Satar in
Kemaman
Types of microbial analysis

Microbial count
(Log10 CFU/g)

Raw
Cooked
Aerobic plate count
7.93+0.61
0.40+0.93
Enterobacteriaceae count
7.39+0.44
0.00+0.00
S .aureus count
6.75+0.94
0.00+0.00
Yeast and mould count
4.28+1.42
0.33+0.78
Psychrotrophic count
6.92+0.54
0.00+0.00
Note: Values are average mean SD of raw and cooked Satar in Kemaman.

Sig. at
P<0.05

Conclusion

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

P<0.05
P<0.05
P<0.05
P<0.05
P<0.05

Table 7: Significant difference of types of microbial analysis in raw Satar at different locations
Types of microbial analysis

Aerobic plate count


Enterobacteriaceae count
S. aureus count
Yeast and mould count
Psychrotrophic count

Microbial count
(Log10 CFU/g)
Marang
Kemaman
7.46+0.79
7.93+0.61
7.45+0.60
7.39+0.44
6.72+0.50
6.75+0.94
5.02+0.58
4.28+1.42
6.77+0.60
6.92+0.54

Sig. at
P<0.05

Conclusion

0.12
0.77
0.91
0.12
0.53

p>0.05
p>0.05
p>0.05
p>0.05
p>0.05

Note: Values are average mean SD of four stalls at Marang and Kemaman, respectively.
Table 8: Significant difference of types of microbial analysis in cooked Satar at different locations
Types of microbial analysis

Microbial count
(Log10 CFU/g)
Marang
Kemaman

Sig. at
P <0.05

Conclusion

Aerobic plate count

1.20+0.79

0.40+0.93

0.93

p>0.05

Enterobacteriaceae count

0.00+0.00

0.00+0.00

S. aureus count

0.00+0.00

0.00+0.00

Yeast and mould count

0.00+0.00

0.33+0.78

1.66

p>0.05

Psychrotrophic count

0.00+0.00

0.00+0.00

Note: Values are average mean SD of four stalls at Marang and Kemaman, respectively.
Table 3 represents microbial analysis of raw Satar in different stalls at Kemaman. There was significantly
higher aerobic plate count from stall A than stall C and D. For Enterobacteriaceae count, stall C was
significantly lower one-log10 CFU/g than others. While S. aureus count recorded highly significant difference
(p<0.05) from stall A compared to others and there were no significant different (p>0.05) between stall B and
D. Among the stalls, there was no significant different (p>0.05) of yeast and mould count. However, high
significant different (p<0.05) of psychrotrophic count recorded from stall A and C compared to other.
Microbial analysis of cooked Satar at different stall showed no significant (p>0.05) from different stalls
(Table 4). For overall result in Kemaman, stall A showed the highest microbial counts in raw Satar followed
by stall B, stall D and C. For cooked Satar, the microbial counts were substantially decreased about 8
log10CFU/g of aerobic plate count, while psychrotrophic count and Enterobacteriaceae count were reduced 6-7
log10CFU/g. S. aureus count decreased about 5-7 log10CFU/g. Yeast and mould count recorded 4-5 log10CFU/g
substantially decreased.

www.theijes.com

The IJES

Page 30

Microbiological Quality of Malaysian Heritage Food (Satar)


Some factors may contribute to high count in raw Satar such as main sources of product and ingredients,
contamination during handling and preparation, packaging and storage condition [4]. Aerobic plate count
(APC) is the indicator of overall degree of microbial contamination of foods and also the hygienic status of
food premises [10]. After grilling, Satar from different stalls safe to be consumed as the safe limit for APC is
less than log10 5.00 CFU/g [11]. Enterobacteriaceae count is indicator organism associated with hygienic
status. The presence of Enterobacteriaceae in the processed food may come from inadequate treatment or postprocess contamination from the environment that may help to indicate the extent of fecal contamination [10].
Yeast and mould easily contaminate raw material and ingredients like fish and grated coconut [12]. The warm
and moist environment of food premises can help proliferation of S. aureus during preparation especially if
cleaning and disinfection procedures were insufficient [13], inadequately cleaned surface after contacted with
food [14], which lead to cross contamination as Satar preparation involved a lot of manual handling. Banana
leaves covered the Satar had protected them from external source of contamination after grilling such as S.
aureus with is the major habitat of the pathogen in the nasal membrane and skin of human [15].
Raw Satar showed significantly higher (p>0.05) than cooked Satar from Marang (Table 5) and Kemaman
(Table 6).This comparison made to evaluate the effectiveness of grilling in ensuring the microbial counts were
reduced to the safe levels. Grilling has reduced about 5-7 log10 CFU/g reduction of microbial counts in raw
Satar on different types of microbial analysis. The present study proved grilling effect significantly reduced
the microbial count in 'Satar'. Grilling is applied to food to improve its hygienic quality by inactivation of
pathogenic microorganisms and to enhance its flavour and taste and increase shelf life [3].
Fish product should achieve 1450 F (62.70C) during grilling where is sufficient to destroy foodborne microbes
[16]. Ranges of internal temperature (78C 92C) were recorded immediately after Satar was grilled
(cooked Satar). The ranges of internal temperatures measured in 'Satar' were sufficient to ensure the level of
pathogenic microbes was significantly reduced to safe level for human consumption. In present study, there
was no significant different (p>0.05) between Marang and Kemaman for raw (Table 7) and cooked Satar
(Table 8). Regardless of the different locations and types of Satar premises in Marang and Kemaman, both
factors did not significantly (P>0.05) affect the microbial quality in Satar. In ensuring and improving the
hygienic status of Satar premises, it is suggested the food premises to implement Good Hygiene Practice
(GHP) and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP). These quality management systems will
reduce the risk of microbial contamination starting from raw materials until the products are served to
consumers.

II. CONCLUSION
Microbial counts in raw Satar was the highest in stall C followed by B, A and D at Marang, while at
Kemaman, stall A was the highest followed by stall B, D and C. Therefore, Stall D (Marang) and Stall C
(Kemaman) were among the most hygienic Satar premises compared to others. After grilling of Satar, this
food was safe to be consumed as the present study showed the absence of foodborne microorganisms in cooked
'Satar' in different types of microbial analysis. The location and different food handlers of Satar premises in
Marang and Kemaman did not influence the microbial quality in Satar.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study is a part of research project under Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) awarded
by Ministry of Education, Malaysia under UMTs research vot 59157. Besides that, the authors would like to
thank the advice given by Prof. Dr. Abdul Rahman Abdul Razak and Prof. Dr. Nakisah Mat Amin.

REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]

Binoy, T. A. 2011. Archaeological and heritage tourism interpretation. South Asian Journal of Tourism and Heritage, 4 (1).
Anonymous. Department of Fisheries Malaysia. Retrieved April 5, 2014, from Official Website of Department of Fisheries
Malaysia: http://www.dof.gov.my/produk/satarikan
Bognar, A. 1998. Comparative study of frying to other cooking techniques influence on the nutritive value. Grasas-y-Aceites, 49
(3/4), 50-260.
Angelidis, A. S., Chronis, E. N., Papageorgiou, D. K., Kazakis, I. I., Arsenoglou, K. C., & Stathopoulos, G. A. 2006. Non-lactic acid
contaminating ora in ready-to-eat foods: A potential food-quality index. Food Microbiology, 23, 95100.
Beuchat, L. R., and Ryu, J. H. 1997. Produce handling and processing practices. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 3, 459465.
Food Agriculture Organisation. 1997. Street foods. Report of an FAO technical meeting on street foods Calcutta,
India.
69
November 1995. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper n.63, Rome.

www.theijes.com

The IJES

Page 31

Microbiological Quality of Malaysian Heritage Food (Satar)


[7]

[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]

Lani, M.N., Mohd Azmi, M.F., Ibrahim, R., Alias, R. and Hassan, Z. (2014). Microbiological quality of food contact surfaces at
selected food premises of Malaysian Heritage Food (Satar) in Terengganu, Malaysia. The International Journal of Engineering
and Science (IJES), 3 (9), pp. 66-70.
Yousef, A.E. And Carlstrom, C. Food Microbiology: A laboratory manual (New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, 2003).
Merck. 2007. Microbiology manual. 12 th Edition. Germany.
Health Protection Agency. 2004 (b). Enumeration of Enterobacteriaceae by the colony count technique. National Standard method
F 23 Issue 1. http://www.hpa-standardmethods.org.uk/pdf_sops.asp.
Food Standards Australia New Zealand. 2008. Guidelines for the microbiological examination of ready- to-eat
foods.
[online]
available at: http:// www.foodstandards.gov.au [Accessed on 20 October 2012].
Dawnes, P. F. and Ito, K. 2001. Compendium of Methods for the Microbiological Examination of
Foods,
Fourth
Edition.
American Public Health Association. p 557.
Borch, E., Nesbakken, T., and Christensen, H. 1996. Hazard identification in swine slaughter with respect to foodborne bacteria.
International Journal of Food Microbiology, 30( 1-2), 9-25.
Moore, G., Griyth, C., and Fielding, L. 2001. A comparison of traditional and recently developed methods for monitoring surface
hygiene within the food industry: A laboratory study. Dairy, Food and Environmental Sanitation, 21(6), 478488.
Adams M. R. and Moss M. O, Food Microbiology. 3rd ed. (Cambridge, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry, 2008).
National
Science
Foundation.
2013.
[online].
Available
at:
http://www.nsf.org/consumer/food_safety/fsafety_cooking.asp?program=FoodSaf [accessed on 12 August 2013].

www.theijes.com

The IJES

Page 32